> A car's width is not its interface.
Let's improve the analogy!
My proposal => that you chose to make the door handles six inches because of UX, and Oracle showed up and said they made theirs six inches before you did.
Let's improve the analogy!
My proposal => that you chose to make the door handles six inches because of UX, and Oracle showed up and said they made theirs six inches before you did.
(For reference none of this is meant to reflect my position on what the law actually is, or should be. I'm just considering analogies here.)
Upholding the API copyright would be like giving Craftsman grounds to sue Ryobi for manufacturing circular saws because Ryobi combined a power cord, an electrical motor, a toothed circular blade and a housing; a state of affairs that only seems even remotely plausible to endorse because source code is inherently a read product.
You look at it and see an authored work. I look at it and I see an n-dimensional turing-space relationship diagram as expressed through transform functions.
And last I checked, you could patent some math(RSA), but not not copyright it. Eventually it's just prior art.